Duncan v. Waldman, No. Cv 90 0045173 S (Aug. 17, 1993)

Connecticut Superior Court

Duncan v. Waldman, No. Cv 90 0045173 S (Aug. 17, 1993)

1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 7318

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedAugust 17, 1993

DocketNo. CV 90 0045173 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 7318 (Duncan v. Waldman, No. Cv 90 0045173 S (Aug. 17, 1993)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Duncan v. Waldman, No. Cv 90 0045173 S (Aug. 17, 1993), 1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 7318 (Colo. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE Pursuant to Practice Book Section 24, the court finds that the plaintiff has demonstrated good cause for the admission of the out-of-state attorney. Conversely, the defendants failed to put forward "some legitimate state interest [which would be] thwarted by admission of the out-of-state attorney." See Herrmann v. Summer Plaza Corporation, 201 Conn. 263, 267-270 (1986). Because "[a] litigant's request to be represented by counsel of his choice . . . should be respected by the court," the plaintiff's motion for admission pro hac vice is granted.

BY THE COURT,

William M. Shaughnessy Judge, Superior Court CT Page 7319

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE Pursuant to Practice Book Section 24, the court finds that the plaintiff has demonstrated good cause for the admission of the out-of-state attorney. Conversely, the defendants failed to put forward "some legitimate state interest [which would be] thwarted by admission of the out-of-state attorney." See Herrmann v. Summer Plaza Corporation, 201 Conn. 263, 267-270 (1986). Because "[a] litigant's request to be represented by counsel of his choice . . . should be respected by the court," the plaintiff's motion for admission pro hac vice is granted.

BY THE COURT,

William M. Shaughnessy Judge, Superior Court CT Page 7319

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1993 Conn. Super. Ct. 7318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duncan-v-waldman-no-cv-90-0045173-s-aug-17-1993-connsuperct-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack